10/25NL at Foxwoods.........

[ArmenH]

I posted this thread because I was unsure if I had misplayed the hand. I wanted constructive criticism from established online and live pros. Not insults. I guess the majority of 2+2ers agree I misplayed the hand. Many online players have to understand that the dynamics of playing a full ring live game is different than playing a 6max game online. I see that my flop bet was weak and the wrong amount relative to effective stack sizes. However the turn push I am still finding a questionable line. Thanks to everyone that helped and everyones insight.

[TheGrifter]

Part 1:

This hand has basically turned into some very good players stating that the hero's postflop play is atrocious and I have been told that my advice was horrible...normally I would drop this here but I still disagree and want to state why in a more mathematical manner.

To the OP I said:

[ QUOTE ]
There is no such thing as a safe flop in a 6-way pot. I actually like the flop bet to thin the field and keep the pot under control so you don't HAVE to go broke.

On the turn, check behind, he's probably putting you on exactly what you have (big overpair) and if a 4th heart hits the board you could easily have the nuts and move him off a set.

Check/call a reasonable bet on a non-heart river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then, when someone stated "no way villain flat calls flop with a set" I relpied:

[ QUOTE ]
This is why I like the line the OP took, provided he checks turn and check/calls river.

If you bet more/push you're going to be way behind when you get called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Post Oak chimed in early with

[ QUOTE ]

Anyway, OP says the villain is solid. He limped UTG in a straddled pot (I am assuming UTG is actually the straddler and so villain is the real UTG player) and called a raise, but only after the SB and BB called. Given the described game (rarely peflop raises, people paying off with marginal hands) I guess it's possible he has a weak hand like two suited cards. Since the SB and BB called the $500, villain could be calling with a marginal hand. He would also know that the limp stations behind him would now probably come along due to "pot odds".

So now OP is in a tough spot. I would check behind here on the turn.

I really don't think he has a set, because he would be foolish to slow play it here. Given that he has $40K and you are the shortstack at $8K, it would be foolish for him to check call a small bet with a set on that flop (with deep calling station to act behind him).

For these reason I think he is only beating you if he turned the flush or rivers you. I call a river bet, and even consider making a think value bet if he checks.

[/ QUOTE ]


First, the biggest point of contention was the flop bet, so let's look at that.

The pot is $3500 and the flop was seen 7 ways. What we can agree on:

-Hero has 1 pair on a very dry FD board.
-Hero is ahead unless one of the villains flopped a set.

Now some reasonable assumptions:

- If hero bets 2/3 pot anyone he beats will fold more than 90% of the time...only way I see hero being called (raised all-in) when ahead here with a bet that size is by a FD w/overcards or JJ (QQ would be very unlikely given preflop action, any ten should be able to fold to a bet that size)

- If hero is raised all-in after making a larger bet on the flop it is much more likely villain has a set than a FD since the only hand hero can get away from is AK

[TheGrifter]

Part 2


- If hero bets 1/3 pot he is much more likely to get called by a wide variety of hands and may get called in multiple spots by FD's, top pair hands, any pair hands since other stacks are deep, possibly big overcards...

- When hero is called 1-2 ways there will be approximately 8 outs on average that beat him...this is an approximation taking into account multiple FD's calling, multiple top pair hands calling, overpair calling, etc...I'd say anywhere from 2-14 with 8 being a generous mean

- When hero is raised all-in he can usually call but also will get a much better read live and possibly be able to fold when he is up against a set

Now if you do not disagree with these assumptions then even if Hero is called by 2 people on the flop they are not getting appropriate odds to call given his hand. Since they are not getting correct odds, they are making a mistake and Hero profits more by betting 1/3 pot than 2/3 pot on the flop.


...

On to the turn, given that the flop was played the way it was and the reasons it was played this way I think hero can check behind here when it is HU.

Remember, even if hero check folded everytime the flush draw hits he would still make more money by betting 1/3 pot on the flop rather than 2/3 pot on the flop, given the above assumptions.

- If hero bets then he will lose almost all non-flush/non-set hands

- Hero will always be called by a flush and often by a set

Checking allows you to outplay your opponent on the river...if a 4th heart comes and he checks to you can he ever call a push with a set?

What hands are you going to get value out of on the turn? A pretty small amount and you've got too strong a hand to be blown off of it. Plus if you check on the turn he may value bet brick rivers where he would fold these hands to a bet.

Most of the people who said OP was an idiot/played this hand badly and said I give really bad advice didn't take the time to state why they think getting all the money in on the flop is more +EV than the line taken.

If this hand were played online I would be much more likely to agree fully with stinger/creed/TWP, however since it is live I think you can benefit from having additional information and isn't the main point to maximize your EV on every hand?

[TheWorstPlayer]

Honestly, I think this is an experience thing. The players who play mostly live have played 1/100th the hands (or fewer) of the people who play mostly online. And the live games are generally less agressive, so there are fewer big pots. And going broke is so much more annoying live that if you go broke you have to go get more money or go to the cage or wait for chips or whatever. The online players have seen this exact same situation or something very similar thousands of times. I think that makes a big difference here. The live players are worrying about pot control and not going broke when those concepts are just not that important in this hand. What's important is protecting your hand in this massive pot. Betting 1200 on the flop and checking the turn does not do that. Betting 2500 or just pushing the flop does that. If you bet 2500, obviously you will then have odds to call a push, so that is why pushing would be just as good if not better in my opinion.

[creedofhubris]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can't believe six people called 20 BBs preflop. WTF.

How about just pushing the flop? There's a shitton of money in that pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

push flop, seriously? this feels excessive and -ev, i still can't think of a great line for op to take when checked to on flop - imo most flop c/r's are beating op, basically forcing him to decide whether or not he wants to get it ai on flop b/c i dont see ppl in this scenario making a move into such a large field. but by pushing you let your opponents play perfectly.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was my first response, too, but then I thought about how many times I've seen this push paid off by top pair etc., even from a tight player. I sometimes just can't get into this mindset, but I suspect a super-solid (not meant in a bad way) player like creed makes this type of play quite a bit. Care to share any thoughts, creed? Does it go beyond, "People are idiots who will call?"

[/ QUOTE ]

Six guys just called 20 BBs preflop. Isn't that proof that people are idiots who will call?

Here's my logic for the flop push:

Ideally I'd want to play a big one-pair hand in an enormous pot in a fashion that would:

1) allow me to determine if I'm beat and lay down my hand
2) provoke opponents into raising heavily with worse hands
3) provoke opponents into calling off a stack with worse hands
4) limit the chance of being outdrawn


I can't think of a line to let me lay down my hand on this board with the pot this size; I'm not that confident in my live reads and I'd rather rely on the statistical strength of my hand in this spot than my ability to decide how much a donk likes his hand.

I can't think of a way to get an opponent to raise me with an inferior holding. I don't think villains will interpret a weak lead as an invitation to raise here, since a ton of poor players in OP's spot will bet small then call a raise with their premium pairs in this spot. It seems to me quite likely that opponents will smoothcall even a small bet with one-pair hands, just like John the Lawyer did. He played the hand pretty well, I think.

Since I can't accomplish goal #1 or #2, I look for a line to maximize the chance of having an inferior holding stack off to me while limiting the chance of being outdrawn.

A flop check or a weak flop bet both fail to accomplish those goals. So to me the choice is between a heavy flop bet and an allin overbet.

I think a ~pot-sized flop bet is apparent for what it is, a strong one pair hand. I suppose it could be a pure bluff with no outs, but if you're a tight player (like me, or OP, it appears) who is incapable of getting to this spot with a suited connector, then people are going to think you are v. v. strong when you lead for the pot here.

Specifically, leading for the pot eliminates overcards from your range. With position, checking behind would be a much better play with AK than potting it. To provoke a bad call from an opponent, you need to leave in your opponent's minds the possibility that you are on overs and their midpair is good, and leading for the pot will not do that, because it's obvious that for overcards, checking is a much stronger play than a pot-sized bet.

However, an allin is a conceivable play with overs here. While checking is better than potting, pushing might be better than checking; you have great fold equity if you've always shown down solid hands, and if called you can pray that your over outs are good. Since the board is suited, there's also the chance that you have two big suited cards here and are semibluffing allin. So a decent opponent might talk himself into a heroic call.

That's my thinking, at least.

[TheWorstPlayer]

As a complete aside, I think JtL can c/f the river. Good post, though.

[TheGrifter]

Great post Creed, thank you.

[Bill King]

[ QUOTE ]
U guys drank your hatorade huh. Relax.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is how i used to react on 2+2 when good players berated me before i learned poker

[TStoneMBD]

i dont think villain was me. it was probably james. i usually buyin with a brick of cash whereas james buys in with grey chips and also sits with 40k+. if the opponent had cash it was me if he had chips it was james.

[TheWorstPlayer]

he already said it was john the lawyer.